help me convince myself i need this TC

I need everyone to tell me to buy this canon 1.4x tc. I must have it, but almost dont wanna spend 280 dollars on it.

While your at it help me buy this 50/f1.8, and a monopod/head with quick release for less than 80bucks.


I dont make any money from photography, as of now, so its tough for me to spend alot of money. I have a job, have no bills or requirements( i mooch off my parents, not in college yet).

What were you going to use the 1.4X TC on?

70-200/f4l

mostly for football and later on in the year soccor... yea yea i shoulda got the 2.8, but im not that serious, and our games are during the day.

The 1.4x will work with the EF 70-200mm f/4L, but it will become a 96-280mm f/5.6 lens. This may be getting rather slow for sports, and the extender not only costs you light but slows down the autofocus. You don't have the help of IS either, though for sports IS won't really help as your shutter speeds to freeze motion will be fast enough for IS not to be much use.


A head with a decent quick release could easily cost you US$80 - I think you'd struggle to get a quality monopod and QR head for US$80. To me at least, cheap doesn't make sense - I believe it's better to buy once and buy right. Upgraded lenses can be sold for a fair price if they've been looked after. Upgraded heads and the like are likely to lose a fair chunk of what you paid for them when sold second hand.


If you want something more than a Manfrotto tilt head on your monopod (which is really only useful for tilting over to shoot portrait), a popular choice for monopod use is a Manfrotto 488RC2. The 488RC2 is preferred on the basis that whilst a monopod doesn't need the panning base, it's useful to have on a tripod, so the 488RC2 makes an excellent head to redeploy to a tripod in the future. The 486RC2, without the panning base, isn't that much cheaper.

Maybe you're better off putting whatever money you have available into the support side of things (tripod / monopod / head) now, including possibly getting a collar for your 70-200mm f/4L. The collar on my 70-200mm f/2.8L IS is excellent and the camera handles much better when supported via the lens collar.


There's items I've got now that I don't foresee replacing for a very long time - my two L zooms (EF 24-70mm f/2.8L, EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS), Gitzo G2220 Explorer tripod and Gitzo G1275M head fitted with a Manfrotto RC2 adapter.

The head I'm using indicates the importance of thinking about what you want. I went for a Gitzo offset ball head as I wanted to make full use of the flexibility of the Explorer legs. I've already used had the tripod in situations where a conventional ball head couldn't have got the camera 'right way up'.

However, Gitzo's QR system is expensive and lacks the flexibility of Arca Swiss. The expense of Arca Swiss also didn't make sense, as I'm neither shooting specialist macro lenses nor long telephoto - which I believe are the two areas where A-S really shines. Manfrotto RC2 QR seemed an excellent compromise, though I am considering buying 200PLARCH-14 plates with their anti-twist feature.


The monopod I have is a Cullmann cheapie, which has a Manfrotto 234RC on it (the tilt only RC2 head). I would like to replace the monopod in the future - it's fine for a digital compact, which is all it was bought for, but doesn't hold a 20D with the grip and an EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS that well! Given the choice, I'd far rather use my tripod than my monopod, not least as the monopod with its fiddly leg locks takes so long to deploy and lock off securely. The tripod goes over the back of my electric wheelchair in a Gitzo GE12P bag, so it's easier for me to cart a tripod around than it is for most. That said, there's times, such as sports, where a monopod is the best choice.


I'll probably replace the cheap protective filters I have on the L zooms. As I tend to leave the filters on, I'd rather have quality multicoated UV filters on the lenses. Unfortunately I couldn't get quality filters easily when I bought the two lenses, so the cheap 1B filters I'm using now (which I think are single coated) had to do. I'm slightly annoyed at myself here, as I paid about half the cost of B+W MRC filters for the two filters I have. Maybe I'll put the 1Bs on eBay if I retire them, maybe I'll keep them for those times when I feel filter damage is most likely, such as in the vicinity of sand.


I'm undecided about a 1.4x Extender. Is it the right thing for me, or would I be better continuing to save for something like an EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS? This is probably a moot point, though, as the extender is about a quarter the price of the 100-400, and is much more portable. I probably will land up with an extender.

However, I'd be particularly wary of what you're considering, with your main stated aim being sports use - a f/5.6 maximum aperture with slower AF sounds all wrong to me. Maybe people with sports experience can give you some pointers as to what to do.

David

Its not mainly sports, but its alot of what ill do.

Most of it is during the day too, so lighting is not a problem.


As for the monopod, i should be buying a good one, i think maybe ill skip the extender, if you think thats the way to go, and spend more on my monopod, as id like to have it with me for awhile. I dont need the fancy smancy heads tho. I realize they are there, and they are very nice. But i just dont feel like i need it, maybe i will in the future, if so ill upgrade, loosing 70 bucks on a monopod/head that i only used for a few months is not such a big deal. Its the spending 300 bucks on a monopod now that i wont get full functionality out of is.

I shot handheld alot, so i cant justify spending more than 100 on a monopod as its only used for sports.

So far my post has got me nowhere, because i still find myself wanting more distance during the football games, because i end up cropping alot, because i cant get close enough to the action.

Buy a Kenko Pro TC and save loads of money.

my only concern for you is would the canon 1.4x work with other brands?
I heard that the Sigma works with canon lenses like the 50 and 85. Where as the canon TC wont work on anything except primes above 135 L and a select few zooms (70-200 ..100-400...)

Go for it. Canon TC glass on Canon L glass. Can't go wrong there, but if you decide to buy another telephoto lens, it won't work with it.

There are of course cheaper solutions from their party guys, if price is a problem.

I have no problem using the 1.4x with 70-200mm...I use it for football and other outdoor sports..but take it off for indoor sports...

Sorry mate, not everyone is going to say it. The Canon 'purists' will surely ask you to go with it. But people like me are going to say 'check out the kenko and the tamrons'. They are loads cheaper and also work on all lenses.

The Canon TCs will work on all the same lenses that the Sigma TCs will work on and vice versa...

Along these lines,. I was using my canon 100mm Macro the other day and wanted more working distance.. on went the Kenko "pro" 1.4X (the Canon would not fit that lens) and the results are superb. I simply could not tell which shots were with the t-con Vs. "bare" untill I checked the exif.

So would a canon 1.4x TC II work on a Sigma 150?

CyberDyneSystems wrote:
The Canon TCs will work on all the same lenses that the Sigma TCs will work on and vice versa...

SO, are the other branded TC's as good, will they still AF and look sharp, or do they look crappy compared to the canon. I dont really care about the brand as long as its still quality.

Bobs web has a few articles:

http://www.bobatkins.c​om …graphy/tutorial​s/tc3.html
http://www.bobatkins.c​om/photography/reviews​/tcs.html

From what I can make out TCs are worth it on a good lens, the 70-200 f4L is probably a good lens for TCs, at least at the long end where all three of the 70-200mm zooms have best sharpness.

The second article looks at the Canon vs Third Party TC issues.

Pro Canon: Well matched to Canon Telephoto lenses, Canon provide MTF data on TC plus lens combinations so you have some idea of the performance. Canon TCs signal the aperture change correctly to the body so AF works acuratly.

Pro Third Party: "Work" on any lens, but how well we don't know. Don't report aperture correctly to body, this can cause inaccurate AF operation. Bob's review says Kenco and Tamron TCs have same performance but these are old models, no comparision with Canons.

The impression I get is the Kenco have quite good rep but I don't know of how much good controlled testing is out there. For the longer primes above 300mm the independents apperently can vignett so the Canons may be the best option for that use.